about Islam - Questions & Answers
Im not being
racist...just find this article interesting
1.Isn’t it true that it is hypocrisy to allow Israel to have an arsenal of
atomic weapons while trying to stop countries like Iran from getting them?
Well, ask yourself two questions: How many Muslim countries has Israel said it
wants to blow out of existence? Answer: None. OK, now how many Muslim countries
as well as hate-filled Muslim groups have said they want to completely destroy
Israel? Answer: Several. So under those conditions I don’t think attempting to
prevent Muslim fanatical dictators and their brainwashed masses from getting
atomic weapons is hypocritical in the least. And don’t forget that it was
Israel that bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor plant in 1981 much to the dismay of
the world. Now it turns out that if they hadn’t done that Coalition forces in
Iraq really would have been facing an army with weapons of mass destruction.
2.Isn’t it true that Islamic fanaticism is just a reaction to Western arrogance
and foreign policy – especially that of Israel and the USA?
Anyone who has the slightest knowledge of the history of Islam and its
fanaticism knows this is untrue. Long before there was an Israel or even a USA,
Islam was showing the world how little tolerance it had for other religions and
doctrines. Example: The great 12th century monastery/university of Nalanda in
India had 5,000 Buddhist monks and nuns and 13 million documents. Muslim
invaders killed them all and destroyed all the Buddhist documents. Why? Because
they were “infidels.” You can still visit the ruins of Nalanda in India today.
There are hundreds of examples, but when the great Buddhas of Bamiyam,
Afghanistan were blown to pieces by Muslims, did the Muslim world protest? Of
course not. And when American flags are burned, do Muslims protest? Of course
not. But when the so-called holy Koran was in some way disrespected, Muslims
were outraged. And when Muslim dictators raze entire neighborhoods and kill
hundreds of thousands of people, Muslims are quiet. But if Muslims are killed
by Western powers, then they protest. Hypocrisy, thy name is Islam.
3.“But I have Muslim friends and they are not like that. They want to live in
peace like the rest of us.”
Ah, this gets to the heart of the matter. If you mean, does the average Muslim
want to live in peace and not start a war and not blow people up, then the
answer is yes, no problem. But if you mean, does the average Muslim understand
as we do the value of a free press, freedom of expression, the role of satire,
the role of the arts, and the fact that one of the best ways to explore the
human condition is to challenge cherished beliefs (such as many beliefs written
in the Koran) then the answer is definitely not. They are not like us anymore
than the Muslims in Leeds, England, were like us. Just because they play soccer
and speak English does not mean they are not fanatics in their hearts.
When I lived in New York City I was involved in counter-demonstrating against
Muslims who wanted to kill the writer Salmon Rushdie because he wrote something
they didn’t like. I remember talking to my neighborhood Pakistanis who were
“just like us” in many ways, especially outwardly, but when I asked what should
be done about Salmon Rushdie, it was always the same: Their faces would change
and flood with hatred and they would immediately say, “He must be killed!”
Do something Muslims don’t like or believe in something Muslims don’t like and
you can end up dead. Don’t take my word for it. Ask Bobby Kennedy’s widow. Or
Anwar Sadat’s widow. Or friends of the late Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh. Or
the families of Iraqi actresses and actors killed by Muslims who don't like
theater, music, etc.
The problem is Muslims move into a democracy and when someone writes a play or
film, for example, criticizing Islam in any way, Muslims babble about how their
feelings are hurt and they picket and in some cases attempt to harm or kill the
writer, actor, etc. Muslims are always asking for people to be sensitive to
their religion but they are the least tolerant of other religions and other
ways of life even when they are a minority in a country. And you will very
seldom ever hear Muslims criticize the actions of other Muslims. In their minds
whenever Muslims do something horrible it is in reaction to or because of the
“infidels” or “agents of the crusaders.” In other words, in the minds of many
Muslims, terrorism is justified, at least to the extent that they will not
oppose it. Islam is a failed civilization which chooses not to adapt to the
modern age as did Japan and China in turn, but rather chooses to cling to
religious fanaticism. We can do little to change their thinking but we must
never surrender our own hard-earned standards of freedom of expression.
4.But when we get rid of the root causes of terrorism such as poverty, then
surely things will be better.
The problem of poverty will add a few more suicide bombers to the equation but
as such it is not a cause of terrorism. The Muslim murderers who destroyed the
World Trade Center and those who set off bombs in London were middle-class with
no financial worries at all. One of the main causes of this Islamic fanaticism
is inside the teaching of Islam and especially as the doctrines are taught by
fanatical Imams; Imams who cannot cope with the changes of the modern world. And,
by the way, Africa is the poorest continent in the world but it is not Africans
blowing up buildings and bombing anyone who disagrees with them. It is the
followers of Islam.
5.What about Westerners who claim Western arrogance or colonialism is to blame?
These are bleeding heart liberals who will find fault with Western countries
whatever the case. I’m old enough to remember the same hypocrisy during the
Cold War. Whenever the Soviet Union did something horrible such as invading
Czechoslovakia, the liberal/leftists were very quiet. But if America refused to
denounce every single dictator in Latin America, that was a horrible thing.
Bleeding heart liberals who blame the West for everything always overlook the
faults and crimes and human rights violations of others. A perfect example is
that of their criticism of America for its treatment of prisoners at
Guantanamo, Cuba, while totally ignoring the plight of Cuban dissidents and
freedom fighters inside Castro’s prisons.
The same America-bashers who never once criticized Saddam Hussein for killing
an estimated 300,000 people and destroying 5,000 villages now love to write
letters to the editor to criticize American actions in Iraq. The stench of
their hypocrisy is overwhelming.
6.But Muslims say that women have a “special place” in Islam.
Dressing women up from head to toe is not an attempt to protect women. It is a
way to control them. In various Muslim countries women cannot drive or vote or
be educated or travel without a male family member. And if a woman is raped she
needs four male Muslim witnesses or else she herself can be imprisoned for
failing to establish her claim of rape. In other words, in this so-called
tolerant religion, non-Muslim witnesses to a rape and female witnesses to a
rape don’t count for diddly-squat. And God help any Muslim woman (or man)
inside a Muslim country who decides to become a Buddhist or Christian. Many
outspoken Muslim women have had to flee Muslim countries and they too are sick
of Muslim men pretending to be the victims. Women have a special place, all
right. For example, under Islamic Sharia law divorced women can only keep their
children up to the age of seven after which the father gets the custody. And
while men in Saudi Arabia can marry a Jew or Christian, if a women tries it she
will be executed. And, of course, she had better not be found talking to a
young man without another male present. And she'd better keep her hair and
ankles covered or else the religious police will deal with her very harshly
indeed. By the way, in Saudi Arabia, fifteen women escaping a burning building
were forced back into it to die by religious police because the faces of the
women were uncovered. No one protested. Some religion!
7. But isn’t it true that Western countries used to act in the same fanatical
way as Muslims are acting today?
Yep. But, fortunately, starting about the mid-14th century in Italy and
spreading out from there, the West had something called the Renaissance. It
changed ideas and means of dealing with others. All for the better. Islam has
never had a Renaissance and many of its ideas and methods reflect the same
intolerance and cruelty toward “infidels” as centuries before. By the way, did
you know the Red Cross cannot display its cross in Saudi Arabia? And airlines
with crosses can’t either? And that an entire printing font had to be changed
in a newspaper in Brunei because (in Muslim eyes) the letter “t” appeared too
much like a cross? Some tolerance.
8. But the terrorists aren’t the real Islam. They are a minority hijacking a
We get this one all the time, don’t we? After every beheading, bombing,
slaughter, assassination and murder by Muslims in different parts of the world,
no matter how many bombs are placed in mosques, churches, cafes, restaurants
and busses, we are told that the religion is being "hijacked." Isn’t
it strange, then, that Muslims never ask why it is so easy to hijack this
so-called great religion? Could it just be that Islam is at least as much a
fanatical brotherhood as it is a religion? And where is the Muslim outrage over
the killings and beheadings and dismemberment of foreigners and other
atrocities committed by Muslims? The Muslim writer Salman Rushdie wrote of
these silent Muslims in a New York Times article three years ago: "As
their ancient, deeply civilized culture of love, art and philosophical
reflection is hijacked by paranoiacs, racists, liars, male supremacists,
tyrants, fanatics and violence junkies, why are they not screaming?"
Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, sums it up best: "Whether a
moderate Muslim majority exists depends of how you define 'moderate Muslim.' Is
it one who will never engage in terrorist acts? That would make moderates an
overwhelming majority of Muslims worldwide. Or is a moderate one who sincerely
disapproves of those terrorist acts? That would reduce the number of moderates.
Or is a moderate Muslim one who actively speaks out and works against the jihadists?
That would lower the number yet again. Or finally, is a moderate Muslim one who
actively engages the jihadists in a theological battle, trying to convince
Muslims that jihad terrorism is wrong on Islamic grounds? That would leave us
with a tiny handful." In other words, there are moderate Muslims but there
is no moderate Islam, as their main schools of jurisprudence all condone the
killing of Muslims for leaving the faith, etc., etc.
9. But now that millions of Muslims live in Western countries, and those
countries have become "multicultural," don't we have to take into
account the feelings of the Muslims?
For hundreds of years immigrants have been coming to America and one of the
reasons is that they know in America there is separation of church and state
and that we have the right to speak out and write what we truly believe. If
immigrants don't like the system they can always try another country, including
the one they came from. It is not our duty or responsibility to change our ways
to fit the mindset of religious hardliners or to kowtow to the beliefs of any
minority, especially one as fanatical as Islam fundamentalists. And, again, it
is important to remember that throughout the Muslim world Jews and Christians
are portrayed in horrible and insulting ways but Muslims never protest that.
"Zionist plots" are blamed by many Muslims for the horror of 9/11 and
for the Danish cartoons. As just one example, here is a quote from the German
daily, Die Welt: "The protests from Muslims would be taken more seriously
if they were less hypocritical. When Syrian television showed drama
documentaries in prime time depicting rabbis as cannibals, the imams were
10. But, even if they don't understand the value of freedom of expression,
aren't there genuinely moderate Muslims who oppose fanaticism and beheading and
much of the rest?
Sure. You can visit some of them in Muslim prisons. Especially the journalists
who oppose the overreaction of Islam. But as an Egyptian judge and author of
books on political Islam put it: "I keep hearing, Why are liberals silent?
But how can we write? Who is going to protect me? Who is going to publish me in
the first place? With the Islamization of the society, the list of taboos has
been increasing daily. You should not write about religion. You should not
write about politics or women. Then what is left?"
And of course he is right when he asks who will protect him. Here is what one
imam said in a recent sermon in Yemen: "Anyone who insults the prophet
must face the sword." And another: "The government must execute
That is why when Western liberals say we must try to accommodate the
"feelings" of Muslim rioters and understand their point of view and
reach out to them and compromise with them, they are really pulling the rug out
from the moderate Muslims and making it even more difficult and dangerous for
them. Again, remember: there is not one Muslim country on the planet in which
non-Muslims (and women) have the same rights as Muslims.
11. But doesn't the Koran have several passages about how Muslims should live
in peace with "people of the book," i.e., Jews and Christians?
It does, but it doesn't mean anything. Let me explain. Mohammad supposedly
received the words of Allah through the angel Gabriel over a period of 22
years. When Mohammad was in Mecca and had little power he had only one wife and
acted like a holy man and spoke of peace between various religions. When he
fled to Medina (then known as "Yathrib") and accumulated power and
wealth by plundering caravans, etc., he became a military man and his views
toward other religions changed dramatically. Jews were said to be "pigs
and monkeys" which is what many newspapers and cassettes in the Middle
East use to describe them to this day. And Mohammad got himself 12 more wives
and instructed followers to conquer anyone who was not a Muslim. (He had sex
with one wife when she was nine years old.) But here's the kicker. Islamic
scholars later had to deal with the many contradictions in the Koran and so
they came up with the idea of "naskh," that is, they decided that the
later verses overrode the validity of the earlier verses. And so it is only the
later extremely intolerant sayings of Mohammad (or, supposedly Allah to
Mohammad) that are considered valid by Muslims, especially millions of
fundamentalist Muslims. So when a Muslim prattles about the many peaceful
passages in the Koran toward non-Muslims, he knows he is bullshitting you. Ask
him about the concept of "Naskh."
12. But you only read translations of the Koran, in other words, you can't read
Arabic so how can you say anything about the Koran?
Muslims use this line as one of their tricks to try to stop criticism in its
tracks. The truth is the vast majority of Muslims in the world (Indonesia, for
example, with the most Muslims of all) do not read Arabic and have to read
translations of the Koran. And even Arabic Muslims who can read newspapers in
Arabic can read very, very little of the Koran, as it is written in a strange
classic form of Arabic that they are totally unfamiliar with. In Muslim lands,
they waste their time memorizing long passages from it much like the dynastic
Chinese used to memorize long passages of Confucius or Mencius. Even though
they have no idea what it means! That is one main reason Islam facing the
modern West is a failed civilization as was dynastic China: they waste their
time learning 7th century of the Koran interpreted by hate-filled imams;
nonsense and hate-filled verses against the infidel rather than learn about
modern science, etc.
So what is to be done?
First, stop blaming the actions of the West or Western foreign policy toward
Islamic countries for the actions of Islam. Almost all incidents of
international terror are caused by Islamic clerics who cannot accept a secular
society and who cannot understand or deal with social change. In the words of
the author, Irshad Manji (The Trouble with Islam Today): "I don't
understand how moderate Muslim leaders can reject, flat-out, the notion that
religion may also play a part in these bombings. What makes them so sure that
Islam is an innocent bystander?" Second, call terrorist Muslim murderers
by their rightful names. You do not do the genuinely moderate Muslims any
favors by shying away from calling a spade a spade: If the terrorists are
Muslims, then say so. Always speak truth to falsehood. Don’t let either Muslims
or their bleeding heart liberal Western defenders get away with blaming others.
BBC prefers to call terrorists "bombers." No wonder in his book,
1984, George Orwell patterned his Ministry of Truth on the BBC. Third, vote for
politicians who agree to take a very hard look at immigration policies that
might be too liberal, and for those who favor tough laws against anyone
advocating terrorism, such as various hate-filled Imams in England. Fourth,
write to newspapers which did not publish the Mohammad cartoons and demand that
they stop being intimidated by fanatics. Write letters to newspapers explaining
that there can be no excuses for the actions of Muslim fanatics. The world is
now where it was when Nazism was coming to power and Europe (except for the
British) rolled over and played dead. Muslim fanaticism and Sharia law is
spreading and it must be stopped for the sake of both moderate Muslims and all
Please note, I do not and never would advocate violence again individual
Muslims in any community. For one thing, the guy you beat up with a baseball
bat may turn out to have just escaped from some horrible Islamic regime.
Individual violence against Muslims or doing damage to mosques, etc., is just
stupid and is also counterproductive as Muslim fanatics will show pictures of
that all over the Muslim world to incite people against the West.
A good case can be made that Islam is a fanatical brotherhood masquerading as a
religion, and, indeed, the adherents of Islam often act that way. But, as
individuals, a Muslim neighbor might possibly be more honest that a Christian
neighbor. It is only that the Muslim will have been brought up in a
religion/brotherhood that is centuries behind the times and has a penchant for
violence, especially against those who criticize the Koran and other aspects of
Islam. Winning the war against Muslim fanatics will take a long time and be
hard-fought but it can and will be won. But we must demand that more and more
moderate Muslims join the fight against fanatical Muslims. We must demand that
our leaders absolutely reject any "compromise" on our right to free
expression. And we must never bow to Muslim demands to curb our hard-won freedom
of expression. And freedom of expression always includes satire and even
insulting satire including satire of religion. Long Live the Danes!
.....Viet Nam TIEN LEN....
Re: The Truth about Islam -
Questions & Answers
Hyok Today, 08:14
Except Israel was carved out of
land that was majority Arab, and Arabs were displaced from their homes to make
room for Israel. Has nothing to do with Islam, and everything to do with basic
concepts of personal property.
Such people have nothing to do
Terrorists like Osama Bin Laden are not Muslims.They are a shame!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Club: Viet Nam, AC Milan
does Islam forbid women to date
does Islam allows its followers to believe in another religion?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Originally Posted by ntn1987
does Islam forbid women to
date non-Muslim men?
does Islam allows its followers to believe in another religion?
Your diatribe has so many holes I
really can't even begin to address them. It has some seeds of important points,
but so much of it is offensive, ignorant, and biased. I could write an
equivalent rant about the history of Christianity in Europe, Christian
colonizers all over the world, and many American Christians today. I could call
any religion a "brotherhood." Your mind will be a stupid one until
you learn to ask questions of your own conclusions.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Club: The Crew, OK
Location: Mayfield Hts, Ohio
Originally Posted by Hyok
Except Israel was carved out
of land that was majority Arab, and Arabs were displaced from their homes to
make room for Israel. Has nothing to do with Islam, and everything to do with
basic concepts of personal property.
Your timing is a little off. The major displacement of Arab landowners occured
after the establishment of Israel. And I am sure we could argue til the cows
came home the who's and why's, so save yer breath 'cause there is no
Also, the population of the original borders of the Israeli partition did not
contain an Arab majority.